Users browsing this thread:

God-Emperor · 07-22-2014, 03:03 PM

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I'm all for allowin' parole, but allowin' the Assembly to overturn rulings of the court is a gross violation of separation of powers.

The Third Imperium
Journalist, South Pacific Independent News Network (SPINN)
Provost, Magisterium
Sergeant, East Pacific Sovereign Army
Journalist, East Pacific News Service
Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific

**Farengeto** · 07-24-2014, 02:36 PM

(07-22-2014, 01:39 PM)Rebeltopia Wrote: And all those changes mean absolutely nothing if those people come back and start their life cycle all over again.
Milo used to be a respected citizen and active citizen of this region until he ruined it in one second of stupidity. I wouldn't want to get over that and let him back, just for him to start all over again.

That's why I proposed heavy restrictions on the "paroled" users. They'd let back in, but they would be prohibited from the government to prevent them from doing it again. I did raise the idea of adding a later option of restoring full access, but even then it could be upwards of two years before they gain full access.

**Belschaft** · 07-24-2014, 03:12 PM

There is already an appeals system, and a certain amount of flexibility in sentencing. Only one crime carries a permanent sentence - treason - and it is the only crime that parole would be inappropriate for.

As such, this is entirely redundant.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES